Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Limited but working or All or nothing?
ericbelser
Member Posts: 783
This applies to more MMOs than just TSW, but I can see it being especially important here. I'd rather see a game launch with limited but WORKING content which could be built on than a game which promises everything and fails to deliver.
Specifically for TSW, I'd rather see the game launch with NO pvp whatsoever and have the "Hollow earth" persistant pvp area added in 6mo-1yr later than have it removed and some half-arsed battleground clone pasted in. Similarly, I'd rather see the game launch with just Western Europe or North America enabled but full of content, locations and story with the other parts of the world added over time than have a whole world that felt empty and largely pointless. (Or pick your favorite area to be first, I couldn't care less if the starting area was only Norway for that matter 
Obviously games have to be paced better (so there is less of a "rush to the end") than they are now, but what happened to this idea of building on a solid foundation?? I *want* my MMOs to be something I'm engaged in for years (and I don't mind paying monthly fees and buying the occasional expansion to fund it) that evolves and grows over that time.
Comments
I thought of EVE when you said all this, focusing on subs, not box sails, which certainly makes both the commnunity feel satisfied and the game grows and improves overall. I think certain mmo developers are going this route more now, TRION seemed to with RIFT, thought I dont see how TOR and GW2 can given the type of content and pricing plan.
As to the Hollow Earth aspect of TWS, I do think they should delay release rather than not include a good pvp section which this should be, this game will be judged on release for what it has, not its promises, and many players will go through all the content very fast with this shiney new game. You need the best first impression, and a sense that you have lots of content. However I certainly want funcom to add lots of content afterwards, and I think Ragnar intends to follow that plan, the premise allows for this.
As much as I agree with your premise, I don't think Funcom could handle another PR disaster that would be an unfinished product(as perceived by those looking to shoot them down).
They need to deliver on what they promise, nothing more, nothing less.
Most importantly, they really need to have a smooth launch. Their previous attempts, AO and AoC, were not good. IMO they really need to nail it with this one or many of the haters will just consider it another failure no matter how good the actual game is.
Einherjar_LC says: WTB the true successor to UO or Asheron's Call pst!
They should just not release it until all of the promised features are ready and in-game.
My theme song.
They need to do whatever it takes to put the features they've offered out at release. If this means pushing back release, then thats what they should do. One need only looked at the failed promises of WAR to see an excellent example of a dev letting down the playerbase. Gamers today are to demanding/fickle to allow the devs to 'work it in' at a later date.
Warhammer fanatic since '85.
We don't have to shoot them down. We can just watch as they hit afterburners and plow into the nearest mountainside.
That being said, a smooth release should be paramount for them. AoC wasn't that long ago and even those who weren't ringside for it have heard of the debacle. They'd better get it right this time to have some hope of tapping into the new crop of gamers who haven't been personally burned by them.
Just to be clear, I desperately want FC to deliver on this one; I just really want them to manage the hype and deliver what is promised, even if what ends up being promised is just a base to build on. I'd be much happier buying a limited game that promised to do more later, rather than the current industry-wide model which is to promise everything under the sun at launch and fail to deliver on most of it.
I should also add that I don't think the industry is self-correcting at all; the over-riding message of the last 10yrs of the MMO market has been that the players will *always* forgive you and line up to be suckers again...or at least enough of them...even if this is another total debacle, FC will have diehard fans who will leap at the next game.
I'd much rather have an amazing game like AO with a disastrous launch than a piece of crap like AION or WoW with a totally flawless launch.
The fact is, the world doesn't need another "perfect WoW/EQ2 clone". I already play EQ2 and Rift for that (and i do play them!)
I'd much rather have a game that aims higher and takes some time to get there than a game like SWTOR that merely aims to be "WoW with Lightsabers" and is likely to end up extremely polished at being that.
I didn't start my MMO career with the generation of "flawlessly launched" games like EQ2, WoW and LoTRO. I started with AO and Shadowbane and a few others, all of which had issues. I'm ok to wait a little as long as the game has promise and delivers gameplay that i can't get elsewhere.
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO
Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall
Currently Playing: ESO
The most important thing for a MMORPG being released nowadays is a polished game-engine with decent netcode. Lag and bad UI-controls are not acceptable, as there's simply too many MMOs being released these days, so the developers don't have time to built this up over time.
Another thing that's needed for todays MMOs being succesful is content, and especially open-ended endgame-content is cruicial to keep the players actually playing the game for more then three month.
Most MMOs these days are of the kind, where you hit max-level, run dungeons to get all epic gear and then the game is basically over and all that's left to do is to reroll another class or to do meaningless arena/BG-PvP.
With that said, I hope for a polished engine and some interesting storyline paired with open-ended, player-driven endgame-content first and foremost.
I assume you're a potential player of the game, rather than an investor, then.
Correct.
Although that is a huge issue in this industry today - investors are looking for "the next WoW", not "the next EVE". We really need to get o the same point that publishing and film have got to - that you can produde an amazing quality product for a niche audience and still succeed financially. At the moment any game with less than mass-appeal needs to immediately cut corners on quality. Hopefully this will change as tech evolves.
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO
Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall
Currently Playing: ESO
Depends on what you mean by 'limited'.
If you mean soulless, unambitious, fuffless, deriviatve design, then I don't want it to be launched at all tbh
A game that is these things is equally as bad as one that dosent work imo. 'It works' isnt enough of a feature to rave about in my mind.
I think the true message here is that the developers of a MMO should promise the absolute minimum prior to a game's release. The less you promise the less chance people have of saying the game failed because it didn't deliver on it's promises. My opinion.
Currently bored with MMO's.
Mmm... a lot of these companies that 'failed' actually succeeded financially, as in they turned a good profit...
... but with the amount of money being sunk into a higher quality MMO, a modest profit is still seen as failure.
That's a lot of risk for just a moderate return.
I'm dying to play this game. I'm also a 90% PvE player.
Frankly, I'd like to see more MMO's come out with solid PvE and a promise of later PvP. I think it would solve a lot of 'balance' issues we see early in MMO's and I think the community would benefit from this type of launch.
The word "fail" is never mentioned in my post. Perhaps you meant to quote someone else. All i said is that niche games at the moment have to cut corners on quality, which they do.
To your point though "turn a profit" is not necessarily the same as "succeed", but we're getting into semantics now.
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO
Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall
Currently Playing: ESO
WoW wasn't anywhere near flawlessly launched, and from memory neither was LoTRO. There were bugs, crashes, server queues, horrible balance, limited content, crashes, bugs. Did I mention bugs and crashes? It got polished because people stuck with it, and Blizzard worked hard and made it a much better game.
My point is most games have had issues at launch. Anyone expecting the game to be perfect on release is kidding themselves. It will need to be playable, and with strong gameplay elements. From there it will need to be polished, repolished and have a few more layers of polish added on top of that.
MUNDO!!